4e D&D RPGA Encounters power level question

[Sploosh]

Hi there,

We've just had D&D encounters arrive in my city and I will be doing my very first RPGA game in a few days. The event is offering premade essential characters but I would like to play my own character.

http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheetvie...sheetid=243312

Having only done a little bit of The Slaying Stone with esssentials characters, and never having done the RPGA, I was wondering if anyone could tell me if a non essential character would have any major differences in power. I dont want to overshadow or fall behind in the event.

[Meta]

Hi there,

We've just had D&D encounters arrive in my city and I will be doing my very first RPGA game in a few days. The event is offering premade essential characters but I would like to play my own character.

http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheetvie...sheetid=243312

Having only done a little bit of The Slaying Stone with esssentials characters, and never having done the RPGA, I was wondering if anyone could tell me if a non essential character would have any major differences in power. I dont want to overshadow or fall behind in the event.

Although essentials material smells of power creep a bit, there are far more resources for existing classes so you'll likely be fine

[ghost_warlock]

Although essentials material smells of power creep a bit, there are far more resources for existing classes so you'll likely be fine

Depends. Power creep for the wizard and cleric, maybe. That new wizard power, beguiling strands, is awesome in any case.

The stances available to the fighter aren't really all that special. The rogue basically gets the Melee Training feat for free, but simultaneously requires it in order to be playable. Also, both are fairly boring to play compared with the original 4e fighter and rogue.

Having played an Essentials rogue through the Red Box modules, the Game Day event, and the first Encounter, I'll be using a Character Creator rogue from here on.

[Jaidu]

The stances do the job they're supposed to do, which is give fighters a few varieties on the melee basic attack that are fairly balanced with existing fighter at-will attacks.

As for Beguiling Strands, I don't see any reason non-Essentials wizards can't use it. It's designated as a level 1 Wizard at-will attack power.

[Meta]

Depends. Power creep for the wizard and cleric, maybe. That new wizard power, beguiling strands, is awesome in any case.

The stances available to the fighter aren't really all that special. The rogue basically gets the Melee Training feat for free, but simultaneously requires it in order to be playable. Also, both are fairly boring to play compared with the original 4e fighter and rogue.

Having played an Essentials rogue through the Red Box modules, the Game Day event, and the first Encounter, I'll be using a Character Creator rogue from here on.

The feats are the first thing that jumped to my mind. The defensive ones in particular obsoleted some pre-essentials material.

EDIT: that said, no reason a non-essentials class can't use them, just something to look for as if the trend continues essentials classes will be surpass the originals before too long

[ghost_warlock]

The stances do the job they're supposed to do, which is give fighters a few varieties on the melee basic attack that are fairly balanced with existing fighter at-will attacks.

And, in return, they lose some maneuverability from powers, Combat Superiority, and options for dealing with multiple targets (e.g., cleave, dual strike), as well as suffering restricted marking*.

*the knight build has an aura that acts like a mark against adjacent foes, while the slayer build lacks marking altogether.

The feats are the first thing that jumped to my mind. The defensive ones in particular obsoleted some pre-essentials material.

EDIT: that said, no reason a non-essentials class can't use them, just something to look for as if the trend continues essentials classes will be surpass the originals before too long

The math feats are nice, yes. Getting both weapon focus + expertise for one feat is handy. Being able to grab one of the Fort/Ref/Will feats a tier earlier could also come in handy if someone really suffers an abysmal defense.

Really, I don't see why the defensive feats were originally restricted to paragon+ anyway.

[Kurald Galain]

Having only done a little bit of The Slaying Stone with esssentials characters, and never having done the RPGA, I was wondering if anyone could tell me if a non essential character would have any major differences in power. I dont want to overshadow or fall behind in the event.

At present, neither Heroes of the Fallen Lands nor the Red Box is valid for RPGA play. However, this is only a technicality, and I would expect most DMs to allow them anyway.

That said, once they do become legal, there shouldn't be issues with power level: while 4.4 does contain feats and powers that are stronger than those in earlier books, once the book is allowed all the older characters are allowed to take these as well. The only question then is whether the new fighter and rogue builds without attack powers will overshadow the older builds. I believe that they won't: the new builds do a bit more damage out of the box, but the older builds have much more flexibility, so this is a fair tradeoff.

[Jaidu]

At present, neither Heroes of the Fallen Lands nor the Red Box is valid for RPGA play. However, this is only a technicality, and I would expect most DMs to allow them anyway.

Considering that the pregens for this season of Encounters are all built using Essentials options, I don't think this will be an issue for most DMs at all. Ah, the RPGA. Nothing like not allowing the options you're supposed to be showcasing.

[DragonBaneDM]

I'd recommend a Double Sword for this guy instead of a Spiked Chain.

As cool as that weapon is, I think you're not getting the bonus damage from Tempest Technique for it. Double Sword works well for this type of character, and might have just the same BA factor you're trying to achieve with the chain.

[Sploosh]

Switched to a double sword, thanks for pointing that out. :)